On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 14:22:55 +0200, Luca Brivio <lucab83@infinito.it> said:
> This make sense to me. These two documents should be
> enough. Sub-policies that don't fit the Policy Manual should be
> included (at least at a first stage) in the wiki-based
> handbook. Furthermore, the New Maintainers' Guide should remain as a
> simple tutorial, yet the official one.
There is a proposal in the rewrite of the policy manual (*sigh*,
hopefully deadline pressure from work will yield soon) to allow for an
overarching policy multi-part book using docbook XML; with the
technical policy manual as one of the parts, and including any other
manual as well.
The idea is to set up the infrastructure to be able to re-order
the manual either by priority (MUST follow, SHOULD follow, RECOMMENDED,
MAY follow), or by topic, and allow for flexible ordering of the policy
manuals.
The format proposed was to create an XML entity for each policy
rule; (or smallest atomic unit of the manual, if not rule based), and
annotate it with title, version, priority, subject area.
If new re-writes of policy like texts can follow a common
standard, it would make it easy for people to re-order manuals on the
fly, print out subsets, and for sub projects and derivatives to add
their specific policies seamlessly.
If we can also achieve a closer relationship betweeen a policy
doc, and a package checker like lintian/linda; then people can get a
polic checking done based on the policy manuals included in the base
policy spec they are using.
I am very swamped at the moment, from my day job, so I have been
working on this proposal at a far slower rate than I would like.
manoj
--
Hummingbirds never remember the words to songs.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C